<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">

<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml">

<head>
    <title>SIGUR R&Oacute;S - Reviews</title>
    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1" />
    <meta name="Author" content="Fernando H. Canto" />
    <meta name="Keywords" content="Sigur, Sigur R&oacute;s, albums, Agaetis Byrjun" />
    <link rel="stylesheet" title="Classic Blue" href="code/classic.css" />
    <link rel="alternate stylesheet" title="Plainish" href="code/plain.css" />
</head>

<body>

<h1>
    SIGUR R&Oacute;S
</h1>

<div class="quote">
    "Hello. <strong>Von</strong> sucks."<br />

    <img alt="Sigur R&oacute;s" src="images/ros.png" />
</div>

<div class="members">
    Kjartan Sveinsson, J&oacute;n &#0254;or Birgisson, Orri P&aacute;ll D&yacute;rason and Georg Holm<br />

    <a href="http://www.southparkstudios.com/games/create.html">South Park Create-A-Character</a>
</div>

<p class="albumList">
  <a href="#von">Von</a><br />
  <a href="#byrjun">&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</a><br />
  <a href="#p">( )</a><br />
  <a href="#takk">Takk...</a><br />
</p>

<p>"Dude, have you listened to Sigur R&oacute;s?" "Hm, I'm afraid not. What are they like?" "Well, they sound just like Radiohead." And you know? If you listen to <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong> very superficially, you'll find it very similar to <strong>OK Computer</strong>. But you know what? Aside from that, Sigur R&oacute;s aren't really too similar to Radiohead. I mean, they <em>are</em> somewhat similar, but not quite. You know? You probably don't. Well, I really don't know how to introduce this band. It's tough! They're quite unique, I mean. They come from Iceland. Iceland is a cold country. Imagine what kind of music you'd expect to come from a cold, isolated country like Iceland. Sigur R&oacute;s is just like that. Well, kind of. You see... Well, this is confusing. They have a quite conventional line-up: Guitar, bass, drums, keyboard and vocals. But they sound like <em>anything</em> but a conventional rock band. Even Radiohead sounds more like a conventional rock band than Sigur R&oacute;s does. You see, Radiohead started out like an ordinary alt rock band, but soon started adding doses of Electronica into their music, and spawned <strong>OK Computer</strong> and <strong>Kid A</strong>. The trick is that Sigur R&oacute;s isn't either Electronica or Rock. It's true that their debut, <strong>Von</strong>, has lots of Electronica in the mix. But their breakthrough, <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong>, and its "follow up" <strong>( )</strong> are not like that. I've seen Sigur R&oacute;s defined as "Post Rock", and you know what? That definition kinda fits them. Imagine that a big comet collided against Rock music, there was an explosion, all living species were exterminated, and there was an ice age, and ruins. And from the ruins, something starts to grow... and that is Sigur R&oacute;s. They picked up the ruins of Rock music and, to reconstruct it, they use pianos and keyboards, string and horn sections, some synthesizers, guitars played with violin bows, brushed drums and a singer that sounds like the spirit of Thom Yorke. <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong> sounds like a big wasteland, but it's like you've been <em>living</em> in that wasteland for a big time, and it's your home now. The feeling is even bigger in <strong>( )</strong>, especially considering the bloody frightening video for the first track.</p>

<p>But it's true that this kind of sound only found its maturity with their second album. Their debut, <strong>Von</strong> ("Hope"), is more oriented towards the Ambient/Experimental deal, with a few "conventional" "songs" mixed in between. But, for some reason, the band was <em>majorly</em> disappointed with the results, so much that they released an album with a couple of songs from <strong>Von</strong> "recycled" by other artists and Sigur R&oacute;s themselves. The album is called <strong>Von Brig&eth;i</strong> (a fantastic play on words, since it means both "Disappointment" and "Recycle Bin"!), and it's only available in Iceland so far. I can't say exactly <em>why</em> the band didn't like <strong>Von</strong>, but you might take your own conclusions based on the drastic change of sound of <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong> ("An Alright Beginning"). The album even mentions the big 'failure' of <strong>Von</strong> in 'Hjarta&eth; Hamast' and the title track.</p>

<p>One of the band's big trademarks is Hopelandic, which is a nonsense "language" they "invented" and used for the first time in the title track of <strong>Von</strong> (which explains the name of the "language", seeing that "Von" means "Hope"), and then in 'Olsen Olsen' from <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong>. Like that wasn't enough, the 2002 album <strong>( )</strong> is <em>entirely sung in Hopelandic</em>. It is possible that that decision was motivated by the sudden success the band achieved in Europe and in the United States, but I won't speculate. It is obvious that Sigur R&oacute;s wasn't the first band to experiment with nonsense languages in music, but the approach used in <strong>( )</strong> (which I will discuss in detail on the actual review) is quite novel. But that is just a minor detail when compared to the band's actual music. No matter how many comparisons to Radiohead may appear, Sigur R&oacute;s is different from anything you've heard. Give them a try; even if you think <strong>OK Computer</strong> isn't your cup of tea, Sigur R&oacute;s may open your eyes a bit if you giv ethem a chance.</p>

<p><a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail your ideas</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="von">Von (1997)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>Myrkur</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>Sigur R&oacute;s</li>
  <li>D&ouml;gun</li>
  <li>H&uacute;n J&ouml;r&eth; <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Leit A&eth; Lifi</li>
  <li><span class="good">Myrkur ++</span></li>
  <li>18 Sek&uacute;ndur Fyrir S&oacute;laruppr&aacute;s</li>
  <li>Hafss&oacute;l</li>
  <li>Ver&ouml;ld N&yacute; &Oacute;g &Oacute;&eth;</li>
  <li>Von <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Mistur</li>
  <li>Syndir Gu&eth;s (Opinberun Frelsarans)</li>
  <li>Rukrym</li>
</ol>

<p>And here you have the band's debut, <strong>Von</strong>. Now if you're one of those familiar with <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong> and/or <strong>( )</strong> and never heard this one (like I was until a few weeks ago), you must be aware that this album is <em>drastically</em> different from those two. Saying that may be a little clich&eacute;, seeing as there are several bands whose debut albums are drastically different from their most famous ones, but it's useless trying to avoid the clich&eacute;. If you're used to the ethereal, majestic songs like 'Vi&eth;rar Vel Til Loft&aacute;r&aacute;sa', 'Star&aacute;lfur' and 'Svefn-G-Englar', be prepared: this album has only two or three "songs" like that. Otherwise, you have plenty of long, Ambient-like tracks like 'Sigur R&oacute;s' and 'Hafss&oacute;l'. And how should I review those tracks? You know, I could call them a pile of crap, and justify my opinion saying that the <em>band itself</em> dislikes the album, period.</p>

<p>But like I said, I won't speculate the reasons why the band dislikes <strong>Von</strong>. And I don't dislike the album, either, so the case isn't that the ambient tracks suck. It's very hard to evaluate "songs" like these: it's very subjective and personal. Someone may think the synthesized sounds of 'Leit A&eth; Lifi' are really cool, other may think 'D&ouml;gun' is boring as hell, and so on. And maybe it's true that the band didn't achieve the effect they initially desired, and the album could have been much better than it is. But the album <em>is</em> good, after all. The only quibble I have is that I don't think I'll be hearing this stuff very often. The eerie hums, chimes, squeals and growls of 'Sigur R&oacute;s', the strange melody of 'D&ouml;gun' and the tribal beats of 'Ver&ouml;ld N&yacute; &oacute;g &oacute;&eth;' may be quite cool-sounding and atmospheric, but I don't think they are any groundbreaking. But overall, this is nice stuff. The 12-minute 'Hafss&oacute;l' creates a beautiful landscape, especially when you consider the title: "The Sun's Sea". And cleverly, the piece is preceeded by a 18 second silence indexed as a separate track, called "18 Seconds Before Sunrise". And when you consider that 'Myrkur' means "Darkness", you could see a hint of conceptuality there. Heh! Heh! Cool, uh? Uh?... Eh, I don't think anyone cares.</p>

<p>But I'll give the album the credit it's due: this stuff is <em>nice</em>. If you put on some headphones, you may sink into the stuff quite nicely. And let's not forget that not everything here is ambient noise and sounds: there are "songs" here, too! J&oacute;nsi puts his vocal chords to good use in the eerie, frightening 'H&uacute;n Jor&eth;', followed by the band's cool, intense instrumentation. I wonder how many people were freaked out by the coda of the song, that almost sounds like the CD is skipping and is going to explode inside the stereo. The title track is <em>quite</em> beautiful and <em>very</em> pleasant, with a very relaxed and watery sound and feel. And 'Myrkur' is a really great song, with a catchy, mantraic melody laid over nice jangly guitars and atmospheric harmonies and keyboard sounds. Real nice: the dark, night-like sounds really sets up a mood before the sun rises with 'Hafss&oacute;l'. See? The "conceptuality" thing isn't too ridiculous, after all!</p>

<p>Still, I do think that 'Syndir Gu&eth;s' goes on for too long without achieving much. The slow, repetitive bass line does remind me of 'Olsen Olsen' from the next album, but that's the only really remarkable thing about it. The whistling sound kind of takes me back to 'Morgenspaziergang' from Krafterk's <strong>Autobahn</strong>, and the song itself is nothing too special. And if you're not aware, the closing track, 'Rukrym', is just a section of 'Myrkur' played backwards (in case the title wasn't obvious enough - it wasn't for me. :( ) after several minutes of silence. But the album itself is quite alright, and worth getting if you're curious about the band. You may be interested in <strong>Von Brig&eth;i</strong>, too, but that one is even harder to find than this one - unless you live in Iceland, naturally.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>11/15</strong></big> - Lots of nice stuff here.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>10/15</strong></big> - Even if it's not amazingly awesome, it may catch you if you're in the right mood.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>9/15</strong></big>  - It's not Earth-shattering, but the album shows a bit of the band's identity.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>10/15</strong></big> - There <em>is</em> stuff happening in almost every place.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>11/15</strong></big> - Oh, I have no reason to give it a lower rating.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/10.png" alt="10" />
</p>

<p>Comments? Ideas? <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="byrjun">&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun (1999)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>Vi&eth;rar Vel Til Loft&aacute;r&aacute;sa</big>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>Introduction</li>
  <li>Svefn-G-Englar <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Star&aacute;lfur <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Flugufrelsarinn ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">N&yacute; Batter&iacute; ++</span></li>
  <li>Hjarta&eth; Hamast (Bamm Bamm Bamm)</li>
  <li><span class="good">Vi&eth;rar Vel Til Loft&aacute;r&aacute;sa ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Olsen Olsen ++</span></li>
  <li>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Avalon</li>
</ol>

<p>Yep, and there it is. The band changed, and the changes aren't too subtle. What basically happened is that the band <em>dropped</em> their attempts to make "Ambient" music and focused <em>completely</em> in writing <em>songs</em> - of course, using that strict definition of "song". But almost all of these tracks are musical compositions, only with a few odd bits of sonic exploration and whatnot - but they're reserved to track transitions, slow and gradual intros, that kind of thing. What happens is that Sigur R&oacute;s finally decided to make traditional music. Of course, <em>their</em> kind of traditional music may be severely different from what <em>you</em> consider traditional, but this is Sigur R&oacute;s, after all.</p>

<p>But enough babbling. With this album, it's useless to get lost in endless chatter, and it's much more productive to get straight to the point. The fact is that the band got quite ambitious at this point. Suddenly, you have an onslaught of strings, horns, orchestras and choirs, long songs, loud and bombastic climaxes and sonic landscapes that aren't modest <em>at all</em>. But I'm yet to see an album with strings, horns, orchestras and choirs that sounds as <em>natural</em> as this one does. You know, it's quite amazing, but this album doesn't sound ambitious and/or pompous <em>at all</em>. But maybe <em>I</em> am not used to this kind of music. When you listen to stuff like <strong>Quadrophenia</strong>, you'd expect everything else to be pompous and bombastic, and this album is <em>not</em>. I guess Icelandic people don't listen to The Who all that much, after all.</p>

<p>The annoying thing is that this album sounds <em>exactly</em> like what you'd expect to hear from a country named Iceland. Everything here is very quiet, very icy (well, not quite icy... <em>snowy</em> is a better definition) and very slow. Sometimes there are very atmospheric synthesizers humming around, and other times Kjartan plays piano or organ. J&oacute;nsi is always using his unique voice to sing strange, beautiful little melodies and making his guitar howl with a violin bow, while &Aacute;gust brushes or taps his drums in a very slow pace, and Georg plays mantraic lines in his bass guitar. And that's the 'signature' sound of <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong>, and the songs are very rooted in that. But still, each song manages to stand out somehow. Some of them are louder, others are scarier, others are uplifting, and so on. There are string sections sometimes, there are horns played depressed Jazzy things other times, and all of that. But basically, the entire album has that sound of chilly air.</p>

<p>But I didn't start talking about the songs themselves! And this is where the goodies start to come. These songs are <em>brilliant</em>! Some more, some less, but they're all great - so much, that it's even hard to decide where to begin. Well... Well, I did talk about the album's "sound", and if you want the best places to look for this "sound", try the opening song, 'Svefn-G-Englar'. The solemn organ chords mix up with a sonar-like *PING* sound (almost like the 'Echoes' *PING* severely slowed down), sounding like underwater, where J&oacute;nsi's vocal melody drifts. There's a very exotic hook in the chorus that's extremely catchy <em>because</em> it's exotic, and it paces slowly through all its eight or nine minutes. This song is the kind of thing a more boring band would want to keep under 4 minutes and issue as a single. But Sigur R&oacute;s leave the song develop and run naturally, and the result is wonderful. The same happens with 'Flugufrelsarinn', one of the most gorgeous tracks here. The song flow is so perfect and unadultered, it's hard to believe that it runs for <em>eight</em> minutes. See what I mean when I say the band doesn't sound ambitious? The <em>songs</em> are like this, and that's it. And if you notice, the structure is the same structure of a regular pop tune. But if you tried to make the song shorter, it would lose its gentleness, its beauty and even its uplifting, cathartic power every time they reach that melody in the "chorus". This is one of the most uplifting tracks here, even.</p>

<p>And then, there's 'Star&aacute;lfur', that also has a beautiful vocal line, but this time is aided by an orchestra, and the arrangement for strings truly stand out. The simple melody they play truly <em>soars</em>, and the dreamy atmosphere of the song helps lots. But after the bright, uplifting spots are over, we're left with 'N&yacute; Batter&iacute;', one of the saddest, most unnerving songs I know. Here, you'd get the feeling the horns are trying to immitate Radiohead's 'The National Anthem', but then you realise the song was only recorded one year later. But these horns <em>sound</em> awfully depressed and hopeless. Georg's bass and J&oacute;nsi's vocal melody are firm and solid, but the real tense part of the song begins when &Aacute;gust begins bashing the drums and hitting insistently that weird-sounding cymbal (the history of the song is that the cymbal was broken and bent on the street when the band found it, and was used on the song). And then, the song suddenly speeds up, and J&oacute;nsi's double-tracked vocals sound <em>so unsettling</em>, it's quite creepy, indeed. Add the horns sulking around the corners all the time and the stop-and-go structure, and you'll start wondering if The Cure are as depressing as you once thought they were.</p>

<p>'Hjarta&eth; Hamast' sounds unusually like Pink Floyd, but I guess it's just that <strong>Dark Side Of The Moon</strong> keyboard tone Kjartan starts using. Other than that, the song has a "pumping" rhythm (justified by the title, "The Heart Beats"), and a sad-sounding chorus with strings, unfocused vocals, and the song ends with a horribly frightening sound effect, like the world ended without warning. After that one, the album becomes quite uplifting again, and you have <em>The Real Big Deal</em> of the album: the three-song-stretch formed by tracks 7, 8 and 9. Yeah, pal, <em>this</em> is the real big thing - and not only figuratively speaking, since 'Vi&eth;rar Vel Til Loft&aacute;r&aacute;sa' is the longest song in here. You might have seen the video of this one already, and if you did, you'll agree with me when I say the song is <em>motherfuckingly awesome</em>. And it isn't just because of the loud, bombastic ending it has, at least not in my opinion. Kjartan's piano in the opening of the song <em>completely</em> do it to me, and when the strings kick in, the recipe is done... And then the drums come, and J&oacute;nsi comes in with a surprisingly untrivial melody, and Kjartan insists in playing those <em>perfect</em> combinations of notes on his piano. That's until the song kind of stops, and the drums kick back and the song blasts off with howling guitars and strings going wild... and quite wild, at the end, when they freak out and start playing random stuff in a different key, and then it stops. Wow, talk about abrupt endings - I bet Mike Oldfield wouldn't have enough guts to pull off <em>this</em> trick in his so beloved 'Far Above The Clouds'.</p>

<p>Keeping up with the streak of gorgeousness, 'Olsen Olsen' begins innocently enough with a pleasant two-note bass line and J&oacute;nsi using his freak voice to sing lyrics in Hopelandic. It all sounds beautiful enough when, without warning, the song switches into a grandiose celebration of orchestras, choirs and splashing drums playing a <em>wonderful</em> little melody that sounds almost like those tunes the Italians sing when they're happy. And it all sounds so defyingly <em>simple</em> and na&iuml;ve, it truly does sound otherworldly. And then, to close everything, we have a surprisingly relaxed and pleasant ballad, the title track. Now <em>this</em> truly does remind me of Pink Floyd, with its slow rhythm, guitar pickings and pleasant melody. And it's definitely beautiful, and ends the album in a nice, relaxed tone. The lyrics are basically the story behind the making of <strong>Von</strong>, and the disappointment at the end. But then, J&oacute;nsi remembers that it was "an alright beginning", after all. And it sure was. It almost sounds like the song is an <em>apology</em> from the band. And if it is, I surely forgive them, 'cause this album is <em>awesome</em> and is enough to maku up for anything bad that <strong>Von</strong> could have been.</p>

<p>But looking again at the album, it's clear that the band didn't <em>completely</em> abandon the ideas behind <strong>Von</strong>, or else, how would you explain the noisy transitions between tracks, and especially the album's four-minute outro, 'Avalon'? It sure does sound Ambient, even though it's nothing but an orchestral take from 'Star&aacute;lfur' slowed down four or five times. Even the introduction of the album is just a section of the title track reversed and played on a loop (remember 'Rukrym'?), but the deal is that the band severely reduced the importance of those ambient things. Maybe they realised they're much better writing "songs", and <em>fortunately</em> they did so.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>14/15</strong></big> - A 14! A bloody 14! That's how beautiful it is!<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>13/15</strong></big> - Count this as a high, high 13, if such thing exists.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>13/15</strong></big> - Oh, don't mind that.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>14/15</strong></big> - There <em>is</em> good stuff in it, though! Loads of it!<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>14/15</strong></big> - Sure. It's very consistent.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/13.png" alt="13" />
</p>

<p><em>Reader comments:</em></p>

<div class="commentsHeader">
      <strong><a href="mailto:awoehrel@netcarrier.com">Andrew Woehrel</a> (January 29, 2005):</strong>
</div>

<div class="comments">
<p><strong>Agaetis Byrjun</strong>-<big><big>10</big></big><br />
Best Song- Svefn-G-Englar<br />
I can't rate the songs individually. This album obviously isn't meant to have the songs separated, they're supposed to be taken as an album. After all, it's way too hard to remember individual tracks when they're so goddamn long. This is a fucking great album though.<br />
Warning: The Sigurs aren't a catchy pop band. Not that being a catchy pop band or being NOT a catchy pop band is a bad thing, but there's only one melody I can really remember afterwards. The rest surprises me every time I listen, and the melodies are huge and epic and grandiose and beautiful, the string sections and synths are fantastic touches. The album starts with some ambient minute-long intro, that sounds like the album is skipping. Then it segues into one of the most beautiful songs I've ever heard. I've heard people saying this song is really boring and long, and awful, but they approach it the wrong way. Sigur Ros isn't a band to sing along to, or to rock out to, or really do anything other than rest, sleep, or just listen to. The first time I heard Svefn-G-Englar it was on a cold afternoon bus ride to Canada on a vacation, and the song is just gorgeous. The vocalist, who should not be compared to Thom Yorke, sings this wonderfully simple but beautiful vocal hook, "a-tijuuuuuuuu". I don't get this, why it's so beautiful or entracing, but it is.<br />
(The music, post-rock, doesn't mean "after rock", but I appreciate your thinking, Ferno. Post-Rock tends to be instrumental, with layered simple guitar parts twisted into epic song structures. Check out Mogwai, Godspeed You! Black Emporer, and Explosions In The Sky.) <span class="edNote">[editor's note: Yeah, I guess you are right. I just thought of "Post Rock" relating to the ruins of Rock music the same way "Post Punk" relates to the ruins of Punk Rock, so I thought my description was adequate, but I know what you mean.]</span><br />
The rest of the album comes as a long, epic, beautiful, atmospheric trip through some kind of surreal ice world. (Ice Land? HEE.) Individual songs aren't important, it's the full effect. It's goddamn entrancing. The guitars don't sound like what you'd think a guitar would sound like, even more icy and atmospheric than Johnny Greenwood's (for the sake of Radiohead comparisons) best ambient impressions. The drums are light and rarely obtrusive, the bass is hidden deep between the gorgeous string sections and synths, and really makes only one lead appearance, for a sexy(saxxy?) jazzy jam with a saxophone in Ny Batteri. Olsen Olsen has possibly the most epic melody outside of classical music, and it has nothing to do with twin teenage whores, as far as I can remember.<br />
This album is unique, or a unique band, don't let people tell you they're Radiohead rip-offs. for all of Thom Yorke's alien-posturing, he can't reach Jon in terms of pure, strange, beautiful, vocals. As I said up there, 10. Get it, if you have any interest in beautiful music, or post-rock, which could be considered the modern prog. Just another form of classical rock, only relying on simplicity, beauty, and power rather than complexity, pretentiousness, and singing like an elf.</p>
</div>

<p>Comments? Suggestions? <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Mail me</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="batteri">N&yacute; Batter&iacute; (2000)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <big>N&yacute; Batter&iacute;</big><em>... the competition ain't very fair, you know.</em>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>Rafmagni&eth; B&uacute;i&eth; <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">N&yacute; Batter&iacute; ++</span></li>
  <li>B&iacute;um B&iacute;um Bambal&oacute; <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>D&aacute;narfregnir Og Jar&eth;afarir <span class="good">+</span></li>
</ol>

<p>Whoa. If people (me included) didn't think there was much reason to consider Sigur R&oacute;s a "depressing" band, here's one EP to prove them all wrong and make them look like dunces (I said <em>me included</em>!). This is, in fact, the release that made the band truly break it big outside Iceland, particularly in the UK. After all, the whole Post Rock thing was quite "in", you know, and this EP fits the whole Post Rock schtick quite well - though the band themselves didn't do it on purpose.</p>

<p>As it's obvious already, the big centrepiece of the EP is 'N&yacute; batter&iacute;', which is the same version already released on <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong>, but don't think that that makes the EP superfluous to those who already own the album. There are two reasons. The first one is that the EP allows the song to gain a sort of life of its own, isolated from the album. The first track, 'Rafmagni&eth; b&uacute;i&eth;', is actually a five minute intro to the song, beginning gently with some tentative piano tinkling, and then building itself up with the plaintive, meanderng brass playing. The track really justifies its title ("Out of Electricity"), as it just <em>sounds</em> like darkness, before it brings the buzzing sound that leads us into the already familiar bass riff of 'N&yacute; Batter&iacute;'. I already talked about the song on the previous review, but just to make sure, it's gorgeous. It's dark as <em>hell</em>, of course, but it's gorgeous.</p>

<p>There's one reason remaining, and it's actually two. The two tracks on side B are only available here and on the soundtrack of <em>Englar alheimsins</em>, or <em>Angels of the Universe</em>, and they keep up the trend of side A: dark, foreboding, and beautiful as damn. They're covers, in fact. 'B&iacute;um b&iacute;um bambal&oacute;' is a lullaby, well known in Iceland, and it seems Sigur R&oacute;s's version is the first ever recorded version of the tune. The tune is already not very bright and joyous, and it's given the usual Sigur R&oacute;s treatment: reticent percussion, bowed guitar, hollow chords and J&oacute;nsi's floating singing. The final result is a must have for fans, though it might pale in comparison to songs like 'Flugufrelsarinn' for the casual listener. I really like it, though, especially because the mood is dark but gentle - it's not very heavy, you see, even as it reaches its small climax near the end.</p>

<p>But that mood doesn't last for long. Just to give you the idea, the title of the last track translates as "Death Announcements and Funerals". Joyful, huh? Actually, the song is an organ theme used by Icelandic radio services as background music for death announcements, and the band merrily went their way to borrow the song and record it. I'm not Icelandic and I don't know its radio services, but I guess that must be that kind of stuff that gives many a small kid nightmares - spooky organ music used to announce funerals, the voice of dead people speaking from the afterlife. Yeeouch! I say that because we <em>did</em>, and still do have some really spooky things on radio and on TV - many a Brazilian kid suffered due to a scary as hell closedown sequence of one of our TV networks, and especially an utterly bizarre vignette showing a Jesus lookalike against a completely black backdrop, with a single lonely light against him, while a voiceover read a quite freaky message from "God" that went "are you <em>sure</em> you did everything you could for your peer? Think again, for someday we will meet". Don't try to imagine what kind of deranged men had ideas like <em>those</em>. Point is that the vignette used an extract of the very first musical theme of the Vangelis album <strong>Ignacio</strong>, and it still creeps me out a bit to hear that song, either on the album, or when it's used on Carl Sagan's TV series <em>Cosmos</em>. It's the one with the tingly, heavenly synth melody, in case you watched the series. But to hear a song that was used in such a horrifying vigette is <em>one</em> thing. What the band did here is different: they made a <em>cover</em> of the scary organ theme. Simply because they <em>wanted</em> to! Ain't that <em>cruel</em>? I mean, if I were a kid and lived in Iceland, I'd probably be scared of that spooky organ tune. Imagine hearing <em>this</em>! I'd probably die. And yes, the band's rendition of the song is morbid as hell, featuring <em>brutal</em> quiet/loud dynamics a la Mogwai, heavy distorted guitars and suicidal drums bashing a "waltz" rhythm. The band insists that the song is "theme music" - and it is, after all - but of course the hip kids called it Post Rock. Go ahead, call it Post Rock if you wish. I still think it's cruel and evil. And I love it.</p>

<p>Seriously, now. It's an EP, but it's a neatly packed, carefully written and recorded EP. It might seem unfair to rank it next to other 12-rated full albums, but hey, it would be unfair to give it, say, a 9, just because it's 24 minutes long and not 40. Oh, well, it's a limited edition EP, anyway, so you probably won't even bother about it. I still recommend it to anyone who can check it out.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>13/15</strong></big> - Highly enjoyable music, yes.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>13/15</strong></big> - It <em>feels</em> sad, not just sounds like it.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>12/15</strong></big> - Hard to decide. It <em>is</em> the unique Sigur R&oacute;s sound, but... eh.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>13/15</strong></big> - Like, great music.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>11/15</strong></big> - It's... short. It's an EP.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/12.png" alt="12" />
</p>

<p><a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">[{(} (&gt;) )&lt;]</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="p" class="best">( ) (2002)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <em>There are no titles here!... Well, it's the eight one.</em>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li><span class="good">++</span></li>
  <li>&nbsp;</li>
  <li><span class="good">++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>&nbsp;</li>
  <li><span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">++</span></li>
</ol>

<p>And if the band wasn't ambitious before, well, be prepared, because <em>this</em> is ambition. And, unsurprisingly, this album gets a 16 from me, because I am a pretentious dork. No need to question why, I just am.</p>

<p>It's true that this album kind of divided fans somewhat, and being the "follow-up" to the mega hit <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong>, it would be inevitable that the question "what is better, <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong> or <strong>( )</strong>?" would become commonplace. And it did. But, whether you think this one is better or worse, you gotta give the band credit because they didn't churn out an album identical to <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong> just to please the critics and fans. This album, unlike the previous one, has a clear concept, a clear goal and a clear ambition. It was the time for the band to truly test their limits, to find an identity of their own, and that's just what they did. In other terms, it couldn't have been a more perfect time for the band to release this album.</p>

<p>So, what is <strong>( )</strong>, you ask? Well... how can I explain? First and foremost, the album's most immediately striking feature is that it has <em>no title</em>. And not just that, but none of the tracks are titled, and the only words printed on the CD artwork is the handwritten name of the band. But that isn't gratuitous: <em>all</em> lyrics of the album are written in "Hopelandic", that is, every 'word' J&oacute;nsi sings here means nothing at all. There are no "lyrics", and thus, the album is completely wordless. And you'd thing that's quite fuckin' pretentious, but there's when I disagree with you, you stupid bastard.</p>

<p>Why? The thing is, it wasn't the band's intent to create a "meaningless" album. A "meaningless" album is supposed to mean absolutely nothing, and THAT, in my opinion, is a pretentious thing. Trying to remove any kind of meaning from art is negating the very essence of art, but there are artists who do that, and it's alright. But that's not what the band is doing here. The band simply made the album without any "meaning" in sight. They just made the music, and left the "meaning" as a complete blank. And so, it's up to the <em>listener</em> to find his own, personal meaning to the songs, to the album as a whole, and to write his own lyrics on the blank spaces in the album's booklet and to write his own name between those big parentheses. Is that pretentious? I don't think so, and I'll even say that's less pretentious than making an album with a supposed meaning. When you make art with a "meaning", you'd expect the listener to <em>understand</em> that meaning (or meanings, in case you're Peter Gabriel), and so you're giving your own art a sense of your own self-importance. It isn't the same when you make such an "incomplete" album and allow the listeners to fill in the gaps the way they wish. It's even more frank than writing "gibberish" lyrics like Lennon did on 'I Am The Walrus', for example. There, Lennon was just provoking his public and <em>instigating</em> them to <em>find</em> some kind of meaning in his lyrics. Here, the band left the album <em>completely</em> open to interpretation, and people can give it very personal values. One may listen to this album after losing a dear person, and giving it that kind of meaning; other may find it the perfect soundtrack to the happiest stage of his life. And so on! Of course, that explanation is what <em>I</em> believe in, and you may have different explanations to the album's nature. See? The album is so open that you may have a completely different idea about it than I do!</p>

<p>But then, you'll realise that, for an album of that kind to <em>work</em>, the music has to be <em>specifically</em> good: deep, evocative, emotional and powerful. And that's exactly what this music is! The music works wonders with the concept. Stylistically, also, it's very different from <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong>: it's more mantraic and repetitive, and these tracks are less reminiscent of "songs" than 'Star&aacute;lfur' and 'Flugufrelsarinn', for example. These eight tracks are more like eight drawn-out musical blurs; "sonic landscpes", if you will, but not very focused and defined (exactly in order to allow different people to have different interpretations of it). In short, this is Philip Glass to <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong>'s Radiohead. But these songs aren't just repetitive drones: they have aims and directions, they <em>go somewhere</em>. They have emotional edge, dynamics, build-ups and climaxes.</p>

<p>According to the band, the album is divided in two "halves" (separated by a 30 seconds of silence): a "happy" half, and a "sad" half. But, at least to me, the entire album is rather sad. That's not very important, though, because the music is absolutely wonderful. The band finds those simple, but gorgeous little combinations of notes and sounds that sound <em>perfect</em> to the ear. And that is found in the very first track. You know this one if you've seen the famous video with the kids playing among the black snow under the red sky of the post-apocalyptic world. You might remember that <em>fantastic</em> little piano line that runs through the song. It's so gentle, but so stunningly sad, and yet Kjartan manages to make every single note sound more expressive than 'Love Reign O'er Me'. The song slowly takes shape and builds into a gut-wrenching climax, and then just dies away, slowly. Who needs lyrics when you have a song like that? Amazing. Track two brings an even darker mood and a quite motif played on guitar. There are drums, this time around, played by Orri (who replaced &Aacute;gust), repeating a quite simple motif. It's <em>definitely</em> mantraic, but it also has those subtle dynamics, and as it ends, the third song comes in, and then... well, wow. The song's basically nothing but a simple piano loop repeating over a cycle of five chords, but the loop keeps going and going around, and a whole wall of sound begins to emerge and build around you. It's stunning and almost transcendental, and before it reaches a grandiose and Earth-shattering climax, it begins to fade, and dies slowly and gently. But in spite of the gut-wrenching effect of the magical rising sounds, it's amazing how heartfelt everything sounds. It's probably the only moment when the album becomes "happy", and it leads into the bright, joyous fourth track.</p>

<p>But then, after the thirty seconds of silence, the "sad" part of the album begins in a really dark note. The fifth tracks is <em>very</em> slow and <em>very</em> quiet, with humming organ and brushed drums. It's quite long and draggy, but the song speeds up at times, in a very unnerving way, and bursts into brief climaxes. The sixth track has a tribal-like percussion pattern, but it's also very mellow and quiet, and J&oacute;nsi's vocal melody is particularly touching. But the seventh track, the longest here, is very serious and dramatic, and keeps alternating slow, quiet parts with louder, faster moments, but they sound quite painful - and the moment when J&oacute;nsi is left dueting with the bowed guitar deserves mention.</p>

<p>The album finally reaches the last track, and it's much brighter than anything that popped up in the last thirty minutes. The guitar riff is quite catchy, as is the vocal melody and pretty much everything else. But the song's true face comes when the drums start bashing out an insistent rhythm, and J&oacute;nsi starts to repeat a small bendy melody, building tension with it. And all the instruments start bashing more and more furiously, until it sounds like the entire album is bursting out its tension through a loud, furious climax - easily the most intense moment of music Sigur R&oacute;s did so far. Definitely amazing.</p>

<p>Of course, "describing" the songs is not an easy job. The album is an actual <em>listening experience</em>, and since the album is so open and vague, it's useless for me to try and "explain" it. But, suffice to say, it's very challenging, intriguing and rewarding. And you must be <em>patient</em> with it. Not only the songs are slow, take time to build, and the transitions are quite draggy, but the album itself isn't a piece of cake. It's not "thrilling", and not as "gratuitous" as its predecessor. You know, compared to this, <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong> is unashamed motherfucking pop sell-out. Of course it <em>isn't</em> motherfucking pop sell-out, but you know what I mean. What I mean is that you can't expect nonstop thrills and excitement with <strong>( )</strong>. You should really let it take you over: listen to it in headphones while lying on bed, on a dark room, or whatever you wish, but <em>be patient</em>. It <em>will</em> be richly rewarding if you treat it the right way. To put it in pretentious terms, this must be one of the most perfect combinations of Ambient and Rock I've ever seen: it's both Ambient music with Rock instrumentation, and Rock with Ambient intentions. Obviously, it's <em>neither</em> Rock nor Ambient, but... you know, it is Sigur R&oacute;s. You must expect those quirky things from them.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>15/15</strong></big> - From beginning to end, yes. This is a great experience.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>15/15</strong></big> - Boy, it <em>is</em> moving!<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>14/15</strong></big> - Fresh, original, creative, but innovative? I don't think so. Not that it matters...<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>15/15</strong></big> - Everything here is good.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>15/15</strong></big> - If it weren't consistent, the whole concept would run the severe risk of failing.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/15.png" alt="15" />
</p>

<p><a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">[{(} (&gt;) )&lt;]</a>!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="takk">Takk... (2005)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <span class="song">Gl&oacute;s&oacute;li</span>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li>Takk...</li>
  <li><span class="good">Gl&oacute;s&oacute;li ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Hopp&iacute;polla ++</span></li>
  <li>Me&eth; Bl&oacute;&eth;nasir</li>
  <li>S&eacute; Lest <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>S&aelig;gl&oacute;pur <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">M&iacute;lan&oacute; ++</span></li>
  <li>Gong</li>
  <li>Andvari <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Svo Hlj&oacute;tt</li>
  <li>Heys&aacute;tan <span class="good">+</span></li>
</ol>

<p>"Takk" means "Thanks". And who is the band saying "thanks" to here? Well, their fans, I suppose! After releasing an album that they hated, and after apologising with <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong>, and after being widely hailed and praised with their subsequent releases, there's nothing more polite and diplomatic than saying thanks to everyone! And I assume that's what the band is doing here, and if I'm right, then they must be really nice guys. I bet that, immediately before they release their mega-experimental quadruple CD, they're going to release an album called "Please". How do you say that in Icelandic? "Pl&iacute;&eth;"? Huh, I don't know.</p>

<p>And the title track is no more than two minutes of a rising, shimmery synth chord and uplifting atmosphere. Well, indeed, I said "uplifting", so you can be sure this album doesn't have much to do with <strong>( )</strong>. The tracks have titles, you know! And they sing in Icelandic in most of these songs! And the album is, well, you know, <em>happy</em>. You wanted to know how does a happy Sigur R&oacute;s sound like? Yeah, kind of like 'Star&aacute;lfur'. But you can't think of <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong> as a happy album, can you? I can't, at least. Well, <strong>Takk...</strong> is quite happy and uplifting, but not in a corny way. I won't speculate and try to tell what motivated the band to make such shiny music. Perhaps they were SELLING OUT to the international market? Or maybe they were trying to tone down their music into something more accessible (note that both questions are exactly the same thing, only varying in tone)? Well, try to imagine what kind of pressure the band was going through: having just released their third LP, the band had the world by their feet. The kind of music they were making was "different", "exotic". Critics and public were in love, dying with anticipation for the next release, but also ready to burn them at the stake at the first sign of repetition, lack of ideas, self-parody and whatever else. Hm... quite an annoying situation.</p>

<p>So, there's always the dilemma: try to do something different, or continue doing what you do best? Both choices have their rewards and their traps, but you might know that already. What happened here is that the band went down the second road. In terms of musical elements, there isn't a lot here that the band hasn't done before: you've still got things like the disimbodied bowed guitar, the meandering horns a la 'Olsen Olsen', J&oacute;nsi's wails in Hopelandic, the Amina string quartet, and of course, the razing build-ups and climaxes. You can judge that however you wish: you can say the band's starting to recycle their own ideas, or worse, falling into self-parody, <em>or</em> you can say the band's just trying to stablish their own, unique style. One judgement is a bit harsh, and the other one is a bit indulgent. So, I just repeat what I said before: the band's doing what they do best. And why risk doing something else, and run the risk of doing something really worthless and bad?</p>

<p>And we're really jumping to conclusions way too early here: there <em>are</em> a couple of novelties here, like the wandering, waltzy rhythms of 'S&eacute; Lest', or the upbeat (!!) 'Gong'. They're only novelties inside Sigur R&oacute;s's style, of course, but that's the point. The crucial point is that the big change here isn't in the musical aspect. The true aspect that wihs me over in this album is its <em>aura</em>, the atmosphere, the spirit, call it whatever you want. Is it a very subjective thing to talk about? I wouldn't say so. If you really absorbed their previous two releases during those years, you may already have a notion of what Sigur R&oacute;s is "supposed" to be. With that notion in mind, <strong>Takk...</strong> will be a real shock. I think the secret to enjoying this album is getting past the lack of musical innovations and absorbing the album's emotional power - that's why it might take you a couple of listens before you finally understand the album's worth.</p>

<p>And, of course, the album only has emotional power because the music is excellently written and performed, all the way through. You don't need much more than this album to realise the band has actual <em>talent</em>, after all, if not because of their talent, how else would the band have so much great music in stock? You could argue that, in fact, the album didn't have <em>that</em> much - after all, there are just nine actual songs here with actual musical ideas, and that's not a whole lot of music to come up with in three years. Oh, give me a break, will you? Actually, <em>I</em> should give myself a break, since it's only <em>me</em> who is giving myself opinions to counter my own opinions. But see? I'm only making it easier for you to discuss with me. But, oh! There's one more argument that you can use to bash this album: the stylistic changes. Wait... but didn't I say there were little changes in the musical department? Yes, indeed. But there's a difference between changing the music itself, and changing the way in which the music is employed. And so, what's the stylistic change here? In resume: the songs got shorter. Yep, that's right. Some songs here are pretty close to "pop" territory, both in structure and in pace. Try hearing 'Hopp&iacute;polla' and check it out. The musical elements are all there: Kjartan's sweet piano line, the strings and the horns, J&oacute;nsi's beautiful vocal melody, the subtle harmonies, the simple but stomping drum pattern, and whatever you can name. But Sigur R&oacute;s have <em>never</em> done a four-minute <em>song</em>, have they? Their last four-minute track was 'Avalon', which was a one-minute segment of music slowed down four times.</p>

<p>So, are they really selling out to pop? In part. I can actually see two trends here - just like we have 'Hopp&iacute;polla', we have 'S&eacute; Lest', which is basically what <strong>( )</strong> would sound like, Hopelandic and everything, if you gave it Prozac. There are about two parts in the music, and they're all based on the same little phrases and melodies. But instead of moody organs, slow guitar lines, dramatic strings and whatever else, you have these beautiful glockenspiels, <em>happy</em> strings and a lot more. And when it sounds like nothing new is popping up, these horns come in playing a "fairground" rhythm. If you want to enjoy the song, you'll have to enjoy the atmosphere it creates, not the musical values.</p>

<p>But if you want <em>music</em>, there's still a lot to look out for here. 'Gl&oacute;s&oacute;li' must be one of the band's finest accomplishments ever. They achieve a wonderful combination of those glockenspiels, the beautiful orchestration, the gorgeous vocal melody, J&oacute;nsi's strange, whispery vocal intonations, and a steadily stomping rhythm... but wait, it's not "stomping". It doesn't "stomp", it mostly... it <em>chomps</em>. Yeah, it goes "chomp, chomp, chomp", as if the bass drum was sucking air instead of pumping it. There's also one of the greatest uses of J&oacute;nsi's guitar being scraped by his cello bow, producing that hauntingly beautiful growl. And when the pace becomes twice as fast, the pleasant melody becomes almost a cry, and the instruments start to boil and stir, the song doesn't just reach a climax... it erupts, it explodes, it turns into a hellish torrent of fire... I don't know how to put it in words. Suffice to say, there's very little that I hate more than a poor, unnecessary, overly pompous musical climax with little substance - and 'Gl&oacute;s&oacute;li' has one of the most powerful and gorgeous endings ever. I don't have much more to say.</p>

<p>From track 6 until the end, the album enters a streak of continuous, non-stop beauty - and surprisingly, this stretch is very... um, what's the opposite of "monotonous"? Say, "politonous"? Well, be it! There are faster songs, like the almost funky 'Gong'. It's not one of my favourites here, but it's a pleasant surprise. The first half of 'S&aelig;gl&oacute;pur' isn't too different, though it's <em>way</em> more tense and gut-wrenching. The band shows a great ability of grabbing your heart and squeezing it until it aches, and this song shows that very well. But instead of erupting into a climax, it does the opposite - it collapses in exhaustion, and ends with a stunningly, achingly gorgeous passage with piano chords and gentle strings. Man, Kjartan <em>is</em> a solid keyboardist - he manages to make each piano note, each piano chord speak volumes. And for another example of that, there's 'M&iacute;lan&oacute;', with one of those unexplainably simple, yet gorgeous piano lines. Again, it's very mantraic and repetitive, building huge dynamics and turbulences with the same vocal iterations. It's happy <strong>( )</strong> all over again! And it's quite a surprise that the 10 minute track in the album isn't a pale copy of 'Vi&eth;rar Vel Til Loft&aacute;r&aacute;sa', like I initially feared. It's just... wonderful, like everything else here. The Amina string quartet are credited as co-writers of the song, here, and though I don't know how evident their songwriting collaboration is, you can hear their strings all over the song. It's a gorgeous song, simply put.</p>

<p>The final three tracks end the album in a slow, quiet note. 'Andvari' is <em>very</em> slow and soothing, with beuatiful arrangement for strings, and a lengthy "pseudo-ambient" ending, with the strings chords droning on and on for a while. 'Svo Hlj&oacute;tt' is more intense, with more dynamics and more instruments, too. And when it settles down, it goes calmer and quieter until it turns into the gorgeous 'Heys&aacute;tan', that ends the album on a quite understated tone. In fact, it's one of the very few Sigur R&oacute;s songs that I actually <em>wish</em> they were longer. But actually, the part that I love the most is the moment when the song begins, on top of the piano reverberations of the previous track. And... isn't it a bit frustrating that "Heys&aacute;tan" doesn't mean what it <em>looks</em> like? It means "Haystack".</p>

<p>When I think about it, there <em>are</em> little similarities between this album and <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong> in terms of structure and sound. But that's why you have to appreciate the aura of the album, you know. Sigur R&oacute;s isn't like every other band, you know: I think they gained quite a lot of credibility, so you can use different criteria to judge their work. And with such solid, well-written and gorgeous music, you just <em>can't</em> condemn them for repeating themselves. I mean, this is just their <em>fourth</em> LP, right? Many other bands kept the same style of music for dozens of albums, and Sigur R&oacute;s has just finished beginning. If you want to start judging the decisions they are making and the roads they're travelling, I think you'll have to wait until the next album... but for now, enjoy <strong>Takk...</strong> for all it's worth. It deserves praise, and I know I like it - so much, in fact, that I'm rating it higher than <strong>&Aacute;g&aelig;tis Byrjun</strong> - but not that I'm neglecting the album's extraordinary power, mind you. But when it comes to <strong>Takk...</strong>, it's not just its power that is extraordinary.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>15/15</strong></big> - Beautiful! There's barely anything here that I can complain about.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>14/15</strong></big> - This just can't compare to the way <strong>( )</strong> affects me, you know. Which means this album's barely less than perfect.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>13/15</strong></big> - It's only fresh, and not much more. But at least, you <em>can't</em> compare this to Radiohead.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>15/15</strong></big> - Oh, <em>dare</em> to complain about the lack of content.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>14/15</strong></big> - Every bit as solid as it can possibly be.
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/14.png" alt="14" />
</p>

<p><a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">Send me your comments</a>, takk!</p>

<hr />

<h2 id="endalaust">Með suð í eyrum við spilum endalaust (2008)</h2>
<p class="medium">
  Best song: <span class="song">Ára batur</span>
</p>
<div class="medium">
  Track list:
</div>
<ol class="trackList">
  <li><span class="good">Gobbledigook ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Inní mér singur vitleysingur ++</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Góðan daginn ++</span></li>
  <li>Við spilum endalaust</li>
  <li>Festival <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li>Með suð í eyrum <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Ára batur ++</span></li>
  <li>Illgresi <span class="good">+</span></li>
  <li><span class="good">Fljótavik ++</span></li>
  <li>Straumnes</li>
  <li><span class="good">All Alright ++</span></li>
</ol>

<p>So will I have to start talking about Sigur Rós repeating themselves again? Not that I want to be nasty or anything - it's just an aspect of the band to be analysed. But I'm actually not too worried about the self-repetition here. What calls my attenion is that I can see a few radical attempts at "rupture" here than on <strong>Takk...</strong>. The band comissioned Flood to handle production duties, and in several occasions, the band is aiming towards a more organic, up-close, down-to-Earth sound. What! Sigur Rós trying to sound <em>un-heavenly</em>? But aren't they supposed to be the angelic sounds of the icecaps and ice covered mountains of icy Iceland?... actually, I think Sigur Rós couldn't sound "un-heavenly", not even if they tried - it's way too much into them. But, yes, they're purposefully pulling themselves away from the "distant" sounds of their previous LPs. <strong>Takk...</strong> already had a sunny atmosphere, and this album expands on it - AND brings them further down into the ground. To me, honestly, that's a VERY good thing.</p>

<p>What isn't such a good thing, though, is me listening in advance to the single 'Gobbledigook', released as a free digital download, listening to it, being utterly blown away, thinking "WOW, if the rest of the album follows this path, it's going to be their best ever by far", and realising... the album doesn't follow that path. Disappointment? To be honest, yes. It was VERY anticlimactic to hear the band retreating to <strong>Ba Ba Ti Ki Di Do</strong> already on the second track. But you know what? That's what repeated listens are for; and, with time, I came to appreciate the album for what it is. The band isn't desperately trying to "change"; and I far prefer the band trying tiny, isolated ruptures than pulling off an <strong>Achtung Baby</strong> and ruining everything. So there. 'Gobbledigook'? It's <em>awesome</em>. Orri Páll slams those drums as if his life depended on it, and everywhere the band is creating whirlwinds of off-beat acoustic guitar chords, hyperactive la-la-la-las and a simple yet untrivial vocal melody. It's a prime pop song, far more radically so than 'Hoppípolla', and its only fault is in leading you to believe the rest of the album will follow suit. It doesn't, so deal with it.</p>

<p>What comes next, 'Inní mér singur vitleysingur', does make it seem like the band is saying "okay, we've gone too far with that pop shenanigan! We'll go back to being our cute, heavenly selves just like you creepy hardcore fans want", falling back to the tinkling glockenspiels, fast stomping drum pattern and wandering vocal melody - complete with the horn ensemble at the end. But, heck, you know what? There's an irresistible energy in the way Jónsi sings that melody and makes it come across so seamlessly, and the finale with the same melody line repeated over and over on top of a mighty crescendo is something the band never got to do; it's like they tried the good ole Sigur Rós climactic finale, but on a smaller, more lighthearted scale. And it works! The piece as a whole is very familiar, but neatly framed by a friendly pop structure - kind of like 'Hoppípolla', yes. So that means... oh, man, Sigur Rós are turning POP? But... but where are the lengthy songs? The sprawling soundscapes? The ambient sonic paintings?</p>

<p>Why, they're over there, on <strong>( )</strong>! You can go listen to that one, if you wish. It's a great album. Meanwhile this one keeps steadily on the "we're selling out to the mainstream and we DON'T GIVE A DAMN" (man, Jónsi is turning into the next Justin Timberlake! Sigur Rós fans: mass suicide!!) path with the disarmingly gorgeous ballad 'Góðan daginn'. Yes, they tried acoustic ballad before with 'Ágætis byrjun', but this one is shorter, faster, and just as beautiful! Not quite as "aethereal" - in fact, just listen to the finger scraping against the strings. How much more organic and human can you get? This isn't the work of a band trying to be "aethereal", so there's little point in EXPECTING the song to be like that. I love the song just the way it is, really, and that initial three song stretch is almost worth the price of admission alone.</p>

<p>What comes next doesn't fall below par, but it does become a sort of mixed bag. I didn't say the album was perfect, did I? It's not. I never really cared much about 'Við spilum endalaust', even though in principle I find it cool that the band should combine a harmonium with brasses and guitars and pump it up into a fun, catchy tune. It <em>is</em> catchy, but somehow that melody sounds... fishy. I dunno, it's like I heard it before. I might have even heard it before, in fact, but I can't put my finger on it. The problem with this song is that the band tries a bit TOO hard to sound joyful and fresh - they sound joyful and fresh on those three first tracks, and effortlessly so. I think they exaggerate it a little bit here, but not enough to <em>ruin</em> the song; and the melody and arrangement make up for any flaws. Elsewhere you get slightly more "normal", but perfectly beautiful songs, like the piano-laden electro-ballad 'Með suð í eyrum' and the "guitar and voice" ballad 'Illgresi'; which is actually quite surprising, because who expected a track that sounds like Jónsi is performing right there, in your living room? The melody is well-crafted, and he delivers it in a very sober, tuneful lower register that evades the "holy spirit of GOD" epithets. If this were a Coldplay song written and recorded by Chris Martin and placed on <strong>X&Y</strong>, it'd probably be quite unremarkable; recorded by Sigur Rós and placed <em>here</em>, it's worthy of mention. Sorry, Coldplay; but I'm not lambasting your acoustic guitar ballads. 'Green Eyes' is still wonderful.</p>

<p>What DID severely get on my nerves the first few times I listened to the album was goddamn 'Festival'. Why the heck would I be pissed off by goddamn 'Festival'? Why, because goddamn 'Festival' is nothing but 'Glósóli', 'Hafsól' and the final track of <strong>( )</strong> all rolled into one!! Yeah, what's with that Georg Holm's scraping D major bass riff that kicks in with the pumping bass drum? That's one tiny step away from the "bass played with drumsticks" intro of 'Hafsól'! And the slow build-up with "running" drums and slow crescendo of voices and strings? <strong>( )</strong> finale! And the final, glorious finale with strings and guitars? 'Glósóli'! That was a disappointment to me, because it sounded like the band was just going back to safe, familiar ground in order to satisfy long term fans. But what I failed to recognise is that the "intro" of the song, with Jónsiman singing A CAPELLA over soft, hushed synth pad backgrounds, is not an "intro": it's the main part of the song! When did we get Jón Þor singing on his own like that?? We didn't! True, the melody sounds like an reject from the <strong>( )</strong> sessions (and it's all sung in Hopelandic as well), but... man! With that in mind, I was able to see the instrumental conclusion as a necessary, crucial component of the song, a conclusive finale. Okay, so this is nowhere as beautiful as 'Mílanó', for example (and Amiina aren't playing on the album - a shame), but it's still a song worth existing. As for particularly good points, I have to single out 'Ára batur' as my favourite on the record. Okay, so the song really wanders around softly as a voice + piano ballad for about half of its nine minutes, while the London Symphonietta and the boys' choir of some British school whose name I don't remember just stand there, doing nothing; and by the end, you just get the good ole Jónsi falsetto in Hopelandic with the grandiose finale, at last, when the whole audience is already sound asleep. Well... at least that's what Pitchforkmedia wants you to believe. I, personally, love the song - duh! I chose it as best track, didn't I? And why? Because I, unlike the Pitchforkmedia reviewer, care about melody; and the song is magnificent, melodywise, and I don't care if half of the song is made up of piano and voice only, and that the London Symphonietta and the choir of the London Oratory School only come up at the end. Who cares? It's a BALLAD, made of melodies and verses, and the final climactic finale feel like an absolutely unnecessary, inevitable, gut-wrenching emotional climax to the whole ride. And that melody they're playing? It's fantastic! And better: the climax is FAR more understated than it <em>could</em> have been if the band had been on "END OF THE WORLD" mode. And the whole thing was recorded LIVE? Impressive. 'Fljótavik', after the whole album has become quiet with 'Illgresi', comes in like... well, I don't remember a song in Sigur Rós's catalogue sounding so plaintive and longing on its VERY FIRST NOTES. Only the first track of <strong>( )</strong> comes to mind, and that was the album opener; 'Fljótavik' comes in after a rather varied, "tiresome" journey. It's not exactly "soothing" - it's more depressing than "soothing", in fact, and the whole delivery - from Jónsi's understated singing, the soft piano playing, the occasional Mellotron are damn near undescribable. And on the final verse, out of nothing, WHOOSH, Jónsi is in falsetto and the whole song takes off - and they're not even destroying the Earth with their guitars and drums. Really, guys, I don't recall a Sigur Rós song achieving this level of emotional response in me. And its sudden, unexpected ending leaves you off to a "recap" of the song's melody done ambient style, on 'Straumnes'.</p>

<p>Keep in mind that, first time I heard the album, I had no idea what to expect from the songs - but I DID know that 'All Alright' was the first Sigur Rós song in English, and that it was a six minute long album closer. What did I expect? Why, of course: an Earth-shattering, radio-friendly "raise your arms and swing your lighters" single for the American audiences tired of Chris Martin moaning "and IIII will tryyyyyy to fix you". And why did I get?... ... ... a piano ballad. And I mean a "piano ballad" as in "Kjartan plays two notes and Jónsi sings three notes, repeat the process every two hours". THAT is the First Sigur Rós Song In English? Well, yes - and I tell you, if I hadn't been informed the song was in English, I would have never guessed. Björk sings with a thick accent, especially on her first records, but not only Jónsi's accent is way, way thicker, he sings so quietly and slowly that it's <em>really</em> hard to hear the words until you're listening closely. And yeah, so the lyrics go on about wanting "him" to know what he has done, which "is bad", and "now he'll know what I am telling". You may need a repeated listen to realise how nicely crafted and pretty the melody is, because there IS a melody; it's just slow and quiet. But... that's just the first half of the song. The second half is the same melody, but Jón goes up an octave and is joined by a quiet horn ensemble. I know I'll sound corny, but by my third or fourth listen, this song strained me emotionally in a way I had formally <em>NEVER</em> experienced with music before. The more cynical dudes will hear the song as pure syrup, but you just need to realise that the artist isn't ALWAYS going for easy emotional appeal when he goes up an octave and brings in a brass ensemble. If it were Bono doing this, it wouldn't have worked. If it were Thom Yorke... wait, Thom Yorke would turn this into a dirge, wouldn't he? If it were Wayne Coyne... wait, he'd be singing about Yoshimi, right? Yeah, definitely, only Jón Þor could have pulled that one off, and the way he mutters "I'm sitting with you, sitting in silence. Let's sing into the years like one" just brought me images of... I actually don't remember what images they were, but it was something VERY close to home and hit HARD on me. I cried like a baby that day (but don't mind me: I cried the same way at the finale of <em>2001: A Space Odyssey</em>). But I love those lyrics, you know? You can visualise what Jón is narrating, you can see the emotion he's expressing... but he leaves it open to you to "adapt" it. He doesn't reveal just <em>what</em> he's telling, he doesn't reveal <em>who</em> he's telling it to; could it be Jón lover? His father? His best friend? What did he do? That is all up to you. There might be a very specific and personal message behind the song, but the listener can fill in the blanks the way he sees fit. I think the image that touched me more deeply was the "father" one. Just imagine a kid having done something naughty which broke dad's favourite coffee mug, or something, and is too scared to tell it because he thinks he'll be grounded; and just as he gathers courage and finally tells his dad, already expecting the worse, he... is comforted by his dad saying he did the right thing by telling the truth, "don't worry, I'm not mad at you, it's all alright". If you once were a kid, you know what I'm on about. If you're a parent, you know what I'm on about. Listen to the song with THAT image in mind and see if it doesn't touch you.</p>

<p>I'm really quite glad that 'All Alright' is there, at the tail end of the album, because it leaves a reassuring taste after the album slows down into pseudo-new-ageville. It gives the album a sense of purpose and a naturall conclusion of sorts. And really, if you're open to changes and new, exciting twists, and you don't expect Sigur Rós to be exactly the same 'till the LHC destroys the world, you'll like this album. Of course, don't trust me blindly: you may find it a boring mix of fake sunshine pop schlock and oversentimental new age muck, or think that in fact the band's too scared to break the formula and evolve for good. If you're afraid, get the best few tracks off iTunes - i.e. the first three ones, maybe 'All Alright', maybe 'Ára batur' if you're brave and maybe 'Festival' if you're a crazy <strong>Ágætis byrjun</strong> maniac. But if you generally agree with my reviews so far, grab this album and enjoy. It may take a few listens, but I doubt you'll be sorely disappointed.</p>

<p class="ratingHeader">
  Rating:
</p>

<p class="rating">
  <big>Fun factor:  <strong>14/15</strong></big> - Overall, the positive spots cover up the not-so-positive spots and leave a WONDERFUL impression at the end.<br />
  <big>Resonance:   <strong>14/15</strong></big> - One of the album's strongest points: the band sounds sincere in a way they never did.<br />
  <big>Originality: <strong>12/15</strong></big> - ... okay, so in some places they're trying to sound different, but really? From track 2 onwards, you'll hardly be overwhelmed.<br />
  <big>Richness:    <strong>14/15</strong></big> - Melodies! Melodies everywhere!... pretty much.<br />
  <big>Solidness:   <strong>13/15</strong></big> - It <em>almost</em> falters sometimes. It's a very coherent record, but doesn't have that feeling of "unbreakableness".
</p>

<p class="ratingFinale">
  Total: <img src="images/13.png" alt="13" />
</p>

<p>With a buzz in your ears <a href="mailto:sirmustapha@gmail.com">you comment endlessly</a>.</p>

<hr />

<p><a href="index.htm">Back to the Reviews Page index</a></p>

<p>
  <a href="http://validator.w3.org/check?uri=referer"><img
      src="http://www.w3.org/Icons/valid-xhtml10"
      alt="Valid XHTML 1.0!" height="31" width="88" /></a>
</p>

</body>

</html>